Question Evolution Day is finally here. Today I want to cover some common talking points from atheists/evolutionists/naturalists/etc that are commonly used against Creation.

1. Creationism isn’t scientific.

This is one that is heard often. The fact is, the Creation worldview is no more scientific than the atheist worldview. Worldviews themselves are not scientific. They are philosophical positions which are used to interpret evidence. The Creation worldview is simply a different interpretation of the data.

However, Creation science is scientific because it studies the natural world using the scientific method. Creation science is merely framed within a different worldview than secular science.

2.Creation Science starts with presupposing that The Bible is true, so it’s biased.

First, everyone has a worldview. A world view is a set of beliefs that shape how you view the universe and things within it. If there was something that was found(And there are a myriad of challenges to evolution) secular scientists just shrug their shoulders and say “Evolution is a fact, so we know that this doesn’t mean that evolution is not true.” Just as Creation Scientists throw out a hypothesis if it is either falsified or doesn’t fit with what scripture says. There have been instances where someone made a fraudulent contribution in science, but secular scientists kept that contribution and its implications in textbooks until they thought they found something “better.”

Second, science is not an objective process. Science itself does not even claim objectivity. Why doesn’t it claim objectivity? That’s because it is susceptible to human error, biases, and opinions. You would think on paper, that science would be an objective process, but it isn’t.

I quote from the link I have just given:

“9. It’s not a process that is free from values, opinions or bias

Scientists are people, and although they follow certain rules and try to be as objective as possible, both in their observations and their interpretations, their biases are still there. Unconscious racial bias, gender bias, social status, source of funding, or political leanings can and do influence one’s perceptions and interpretations.”

There is a distinct difference between the concept/philosophy of science on paper and what actually happens on the field. This is why such a distinction needs to be made. Strong proponents of evolution forget though that science itself is designed to be an objective process, it just doesn’t work that way in reality due to the flaws of the humans doing science.

3. Christians(Especially Creationists) are against science.

This is a straw man. I can’t think of one major Creationist resource that says that we are against science. Do Creationists accept universal common descent? No. But just because we reject a mainstream science idea does not mean that we hate science. If we hated science, we wouldn’t be using science to show that our observations of the natural world are consistent with what The Bible says now would we?

And we are against science? We are the ones who pioneered it! We are the ones who founded genetics. Here is a list of scientists who are Creationists that contributed to science. This isn’t even all of them either. There are Christians(and Creationists) that participate in research even today. In fact, there are more young earth creationists that are teaching children and college students in science classes today.

4. You have Science to thank for all of the discoveries and technology it has lead to.

Science and Christianity are not in opposition. What is in opposition are our world views. By the way, Both Christians and Creationists have made contributions to science as well. In fact, we are the ones who pioneered it. More on this will be below. I would say that you have us to thank for all the discoveries and advancement in science. You will never learn that many of the pioneers in science were actually Biblical Creationists.

5. Science condones naturalism.

Science doesn’t condone anything. Science is only able to study the natural world. Science does not say that only nature exists. When anyone finds an example of a peer reviewed science journal that says that the super natural doesn’t exist, please let me know.

Creationists have to use their own peer reviewed journals because of how protective some main stream scientists are of evolution. However, if you sit down with a scientist when they are not at work many will tell you that they are skeptical of at least some parts of Darwinian evolution from a universal common ancestor.

If you want to see some examples of censorship I highly recommend watching this video.It’s over an hour and a half long but it’s worth it:

7. If we allow Creation Science to be taught we won’t advance in Science.

Creation science slowing down the progress of science is a myth. In fact, Pensacola Christian Academy(Which teaches Young Earth Creation) does a better job of educating students than public schools that teach evolution do. We should be teaching kids to critique models(Even critiquing the young earth model is good because critique helps to advance it.) instead of taking the scientist’s word for it.Here is a list of Creationists and their contributions: